get_contract_subscriptions

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Get,' implying a read operation, but lacks explicit statements about read-only, side effects, permissions, or rate limits. This is insufficient for transparency.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is two sentences with no redundant information. It front-loads the main purpose and then adds a conditional note. Every sentence earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no output schema, the description should hint at the return structure (e.g., list of subscriptions). It does not mention return format, edge cases, or error conditions. For a three-parameter tool, it is somewhat incomplete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 67% (two out of three parameters have descriptions). The description adds context for the 'contract_address' parameter ('optional if deployed contracts are configured'), which clarifies its usage beyond the schema. However, it adds little for 'address' and nothing for 'network.' Overall, it adds some value but does not fully compensate for the missing schema descriptions.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'subscriptions registered in the SubscriptionKiller smart contract for a user.' It also specifies that the contract address is optional if defaults are configured, distinguishing it from siblings like 'scan_wallet' or 'check_allowance' which have different purposes.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides minimal guidance: 'Contract address is optional if deployed contracts are configured.' It does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'scan_wallet'), nor does it provide conditions or prerequisites for use.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.